The founder of the Chinese technology giant Huawei, Ren Zhengfei, has said in an interview with Bloomberg that he would be "the first to protest" if Beijing retaliates against the US-based tech giant Apple.
A Bloomberg reporter has asked the Huawei CEO in an interview whether he would retaliate against Apple amid "calls by some in China" to take countermeasures against the US company.
"That will not happen, first of all. And second of all, if that happens, I'll be the first to protest. Apple is the world's leading company. If there was no Apple, there would be no mobile internet. If there was no Apple to help show us the world, we would not see the beauty of this world. Apple is my teacher. It's advancing in front of us. As a student, why should I oppose my teacher? I would never do that", Ren Zhengfei has told Bloomberg in an interview, published on Sunday.
Huawei has been accused by several countries of being sponsored by the Chinese state and spying on its behalf through its devices.
US President Donald Trump issued an executive order earlier in May that added Huawei and its 70 affiliates to a trade blacklist, thereby restricting its activity in the country. US companies are hence required to receive permission before trading with the telecom company.
As a result, Google had to suspend business operations with Huawei, including the transfer of all hardware, software and technical services, except those publicly available via open source licensing. This move has already impacted the telecom giant, with several mobile carriers, such as UK Vodafone and EE suspending their launches of new Huawei products.
The standoff between Huawei and Apple was sparked by the December arrest of Huawei Chief Financial Officer Meng Wanzhou, the daughter of Huawei's founder in Canada, for alleged violations of US sanctions on Iran. Beijing decried the move and demanded that Canada immediately release the Chinese national.
In January, the Chinese telecom giant punished staffers who used an iPhone to send an official company tweet amid a standoff between the two tech giants. In an internal memo, published online by Chinese media, Huawei said those responsible were demoted and had their salaries slashed by $730.
Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo claimed on Thursday that the Chinese tech giant allegedly had close links to not only the Chinese government but also to the Chinese Communist Party. He said that these ties significantly threatened any US-related information that passed via Huawei's devices. Pompeo also said the State Department expected more companies worldwide to cut ties with Huawei in the future.
The Chinese Foreign Ministry said Friday that Pompeo's remarks were made in an attempt to stir up ideological resistance against the company.
Last year, the United States, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand banned the company from participating in government contracts due to security concerns. Huawei has vehemently denied all allegations of spying.
Huawei has repeatedly denied it is controlled by the Chinese government, military or intelligence services.
Ren also responded to critics who claim that Huawei got to where it is currently through intellectual property (IP) theft and government support.
"The US has not developed that technology so from where should I steal it?" he asked.
"We are leading the US. If we were behind, Trump would not need to make so many efforts to attack us."
As the number of companies supplying Huawei with components and software falls, Ren added that Huawei would use its own products instead.
"The US manages its own companies. The US is not the international police - they can't manage the whole world. The rest of the world decides whether they should work with us based on their own business interests and positions," he said.
"If the US imposes further restrictions on us, we will reduce our purchases from the US and use more of our own chips. If American companies have permission from Washington to sell to us, we will continue to buy from them."
Last week, Trump also, for the first time,linked a dispute over Huawei, which he views as a threat to American security, with a deal to resolve the US-China trade war.
"Huawei is something that is very dangerous," Trump told reporters at the White House. "You look at what they've done from a security standpoint, a military standpoint. Very dangerous."
Ren told Bloomberg that there was no need for negotiation over the issue.
"The US has never bought products from us. Even if the US wants to buy our products in the future, I may not sell to them. There is no need for negotiation."
It seems the world is spiraling into turbulence. All
countries need to act prudently. They need to make as many friends as
they can and avoid becoming tools of other countries. They should also
cast aside illusions of using geopolitical methods to realize
development goals that can't be achieved economically.
As Huawei is pinned in the eye of the China-US trade war,
French President Emmanuel Macron claimed Europe won't capitulate to US
pressure to block the Chinese tech company. What is Europe's attitude
toward US demands? What impact has the trade conflict caused for Europe?
THE United States ranks low in the credibility stakes. It can no longer wax lyrical about free trade and fair play because the world now knows that when it finds itself facing stiff competition, it uses a ruling the magnitude of a nuclear bomb to retaliate.
Firstly, US president Donald Trump declared a national emergency and barred American companies from doing business with companies deemed a national security risk.
Then, companies like Google and Microsoft stopped making software and services available to Huawei, China’s biggest smartphone vendor.
The ban essentially means that future Huawei phones will no longer get Google play apps, YouTube, and almost certainly no updates to Android Q or other platform-level upgrades since these would require Google’s sign-off, too.
Sure, you can still make calls or use WeChat and other Chinese platforms, but for users in most parts of the world, the phone is pretty much useless.
Word is that Huawei poses a security risk, but no clarification has been forthcoming to what these threats include exactly.
There is a sense of déjà vu here.
The world was once told by the US and its allies that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but we learnt in the end there were none. Now, we have the Iran threat, but that’s another story all together.
From what little info has trickled into the worldwide web, the suggestion is that Chinese-manufactured devices have hidden back doors that could potentially allow an attacker to gain special access.
It sounds like a script excerpt from a James Bond movie, with spooks using a master password to break into high security facilities.
But incredibly, Huawei and ZTE Corp, another telecommunications equipment manufacturer, were cleared by the US House of Representatives permanent select committee on intelligence.
The two had been accused of providing “incomplete, contradictory and evasive responses to the committee’s core concerns” during their year-long investigation on the threat they supposedly pose to American interests.
In the end, the committee found no concrete evidence of infringement. But that didn’t stop the two companies from being labelled a national security risk and getting kicked out of the US.
IS, the German internet security watchdog, inspected Huawei laboratories in Germany and found no evidence of espionage, and The New York Times quoted American officials saying that the case against the company had “no smoking gun – just a heightened concern about the firm’s rising technological dominance”.
Rightly or wrongly, in the game of perception, the US has lost its moral ground. Thanks, in many ways, to an impulsive president.
Most of the world’s population thinks the bullying of Huawei is simply Trump’s hallmark. It isn’t about a security risk, but an economic threat.
Outside China, Huawei is arguably the most successful Chinese consumer brand so far. Thanks to a good and relatively cheaper product, it is now the second largest phone vendor in the world.
One strong accusation levelled at Huawei is that it enjoys Chinese government backing, and that China uses its spies to steal US technology for these private companies.
It’s a really warped perspective because, using the same logic, why is the US president taking such a hard line against a private company that’s merely selling phones?
The answer could well lie in the technology race.
Now, it’s about who launches 5G first, the next generation of mobile broadband imminently replacing 4G.
With 5G, we will see exponentially faster download and upload speeds. Huawei is widely renowned for being 12 months ahead of its competitors in the 5G race.
It began to develop its own 5G technology in as early as 2009. In 2013, Huawei hired more than 300 top experts from the wireless industry around the world and announced that they had invested US$600mil (RM2.5bil) in 5G research.
In 2016, Huawei set up a 5G product line for such devices.
What started as a three-man company now has thousands of employees engaged in 5G product development. Following this, in 2017, and then in 2018, Huawei invested almost US$1.4bil (RM5.8bil) in 5G product development.
The South China Morning Post has, however, also reported that apart from its tremendous commercial benefits, 5G – the fifth generation of mobile communication – is revolutionising military and security technology, which is partly why it has become a focal point in the US’ efforts to contain China’s rise as a tech power, and the Western nation’s allegations against Chinese companies is simply symptomatic of its insecurities.
“The future landscape of warfare and cybersecurity could be fundamentally changed by 5G.
“But experts say 5G is more susceptible to hacking than previous networks, at a time of rising security concerns and US-China tensions on various interconnected fronts that include trade, influence in the Asia-Pacific region and technological rivalry.
“These tensions provide the backdrop to controversy surrounding Huawei, the world’s largest telecoms equipment supplier.”
It’s also a fight between China and the US on who leads the artificial intelligence domain, as with 5G advancements, it means “whereas existing networks connect people to people, the next generation will connect a vast network of sensors, robots and autonomous vehicles through sophisticated artificial intelligence.
“The so-called Internet of Things will allow objects to ‘communicate’ with each other by exchanging vast volumes of data in real time, and without human intervention.
“Autonomous factories, long-distance surgery or robots preparing your breakfast – things that previously existed only in science fiction – will be made possible.
“Meanwhile, though, it is being identified by many military experts as the cornerstone of future military technology,” the newspaper reported.
As TV personality Trevor Noah says, humorously, in his show, the 5G war isn’t just about “loading an entire movie in three seconds but about the Chinese spying – which the US also wants to do.”
He sarcastically added that “the US is losing the 5G race and luckily, we have a maniac in our team who’s willing to play dirty.”
As the battle rages on, spilling into the already acrimonious US-China trade war, the controversy has become more bitter, and complicated, with the US egging its allies to ban Huawei from building its next generation of mobile phone networks. So far, Britain, Germany, Australia, New Zealand and Canada have either banned Huawei or are reviewing whether to do so.
Japan, a US ally, seems to have been dragged into the propaganda of persecuting Huawei, too.
In China, the actions against Huawei have stirred a storm of nationalism, with the Chinese calling for a boycott of iPhone, a reaction which could eventually affect other American and European products, at the rate things are escalating.
Even within the Chinese diaspora, the messages of unequivocal support for Huawei have gone viral in the world’s social media sphere.
The irony is that the iPhone is not only assembled in China, but its very inception starts in that country at a much earlier stage, and from a much deeper part of the earth, too.
At least 90% of rare earth minerals – naturally occurring solids whose combination comprises essential iPhone parts – are mined in China, notably in Mongolia, it’s reported.
“Lanthanides, scandium, yttrium and some other alien-sounding names at the bottom of the periodic table (remember your secondary school?) make the iPhone ‘light, bright and loud.’ Its colour screen, glass polishing, circuitry, speakers and vibration unit come from a mix of these rare earth minerals,” it says in Finances Online.
The report added that where American companies would take months to pool thousands of industrial engineers, and even more months to construct new assembly lines to accommodate a trivial but urgent change in an iPhone spec (say, its glass panel needing to curve to hatch on the body six weeks prior to launching), it only takes 15 days in China to do the same.
“To put it in perspective, one production line in China can assemble 72,000 iPhone 5 back plates daily; one factory can have four to five production lines and China can have as much as a hundred of these factories, opening or closing a few of them depending on the current demand.
“The last part – opening and closing plants like a mom-and-pop store – is almost impossible in an American economy.
“It is no longer a city counting the number of manufacturing plants it has, but the manufacturing plant can be counted as a city in many Asian economic zones.”
And it’s common knowledge that Mickey Mouse merchandise is made in China, and likewise all the branded sportswear sold globally. The profits these companies are raking in are simply down to the low cost of operation.
Trump should know and do better. Instead of threatening and bullying Huawei with trumped up charges, he should urge American companies to be more competitive, make better products and keep prices low.
I am dumping my iPhone, upgrading my South Korean Samsung and for the first time, getting myself a Huawei. I hear the camera is really good, and it doesn’t even need a zoom lens for magnification. And that sophistication comes from a license to thrill.
By Wong Chun Wai
Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now editorial and corporate affairs adviser to the group, after having served as group managing director/chief executive officer.
On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.
US President Donald Trump on Thursday announced a $16
billion aid package for farmers to offset their losses from the trade
war with China. He said the package "will be paid for by the billions of
dollars" from tariffs on Chinese imports.
All Chinese companies wishing to get to the high-tech
mountaintop should learn from Huawei's composed example. If only there
were a group of Chinese companies sharing intellectual property with
foreign partners, then certain malicious forces would hesitate at a
crackdown.
China's economic potential is far greater than that of
the US, the largest economy. There is no doubt that China's economic
prospects are the best in the world. These facts drive China's core
competitiveness. They will make Washington feel its ability falls short
of its wishes when it comes to containing Beijing.
Chinese people do not know whether we should call US
approaches hegemonic politics or profiteering politics. But in short,
they are crooked means. The threat of tariffs will not work. Neither
will US threats against Chinese companies create a shock wave against
China. The US is picking a wrong opponent at a wrong time. It will find
no way of crafting a good result from a strategic mistake.
The US is having a profound effect on the global economic
order by abusing national security and trampling on commercial
principles. Current US administration is destroying the reputation and
national image that generations of Americans have built. Such arrogance
and hegemony are by no means good signs for the US.
New world order: People visit the bund in front of Shanghai's financial district of Pudong. The US-China trade war looks like the beginning of a profound break in the global order. As China and the United form two opposing economic and geopolitical coalitions, the rest of the world will be forced to choose. - Reuters
President Donald Trump has long said the goal of his trade policy is simply to get better deals for Americans. But as the trade war intensifies, it seems increasingly likely that his policies will lead to something more: a lasting break with China and a new alignment of global power.
First, consider the evidence for the break.
The current impasse in trade talks was sparked by a sudden change in terms on the part of the Chinese negotiators.
This change likely caught the administration off guard, but Trump’s response is notable: He immediately ramped up tariffs, then announced a ban on business with Chinese telecommunications firm and national champion Huawei Technologies Co.
These actions have backed Chinese President Xi Jinping into a corner and turned the trade dispute into a matter of Chinese national pride.
This limits the possibility not only of a quick resolution, but also of the chances that the Chinese people will accept any concessions to the US.
Trump’s handling of this situation stands in sharp contrast to his negotiating strategy on other issues.
Though the president railed against NAFTA throughout his campaign, he’s touted its replacement as a huge success, even though it is only cosmetically different, and has been willing to suspend his tariffs on Canada and Mexico to ease its passage through Congress.
Likewise, Trump has been more than willing to trumpet his successful negotiations with North Korean leader Kim Jong Un even though the evidence for such success is thin.
Meanwhile, the president’s tough talk against Europe and Japan for their trade practices, and against NATO allies for their defence spending, has been mostly bluster.
When it comes to China, however, the president is doubling down.
He has encouraged US supply chains to move out of China and established subsidy programmes to cushion farmers from the effects of a protracted trade war.
Which leads to the long-term implications of this battle. A protracted trade war would almost guarantee a global realignment.
Supply chains that run through both the US and China would constantly be subject to disruptions, so global manufacturers would have to decide whether to pursue an America-centric or China-centric strategy.
That’s already the case in the digital sphere, where Chinese restrictions on the Internet divide the world into two parts: that which is served by US tech giants such as Google and Facebook, and that which relies on Chinese firms such as Baidu and WeChat.
China’s threat to cut off US access to rare-earth minerals points to a potential bifurcation in commodities markets as well.
The trend is clear: As China’s economic and geopolitical power grows, countries within China’s sphere of influence will feel increasing pressure to integrate their economies with Chinese supply chains and multinationals rather than American ones.
At the same time, as my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Tyler Cowen points out, the rise of China is a main driver of populist sentiment in the UK and Australia.
This creates political pressure in those countries for further isolation from China.
In the US, Trump has made it clear that he sees the trade war with China as politically advantageous for him, and he’s probably right.
It’s probably also true that this anti-China sentiment will outlast him.
Break in global order
Add up all these factors, and the US-China trade war looks like the beginning of a profound break in the global order. As China and the US form two opposing economic and geopolitical coalitions, the rest of the world will be forced to choose.
Maybe the European Union can form a third unaligned pole, as France and Germany’s membership in the EU (and the UK’s absence from it) provides them with the negotiating power to avoid falling under the Chinese or American sphere of influence.
Of course, in some ways this type of multipolar alignment would be a return to the past. The dual-superpower world that existed for much of the second half of the 20th century was always an exception, and the era of American supremacy that began after the collapse of the Soviet Union was never going to last.
Until recently, however, a new kind of bipolar arrangement seemed possible: a kind of competitive partnership between China and the US, with the EU playing a supporting role.
The events of the last few weeks have left that looking increasingly unlikely. — Bloomberg Opinion
By Karl W. Smith , a former assistant professor of economics at the University of North Carolina’s school of government.
China now has no choice but to pursue technological independence, and will burn the cash to achieve it.
... A similar process took place when ZTE Corp. was banned from buying
U.S. products after reneging on a deal to settle charges of breaking
trade sanctions. ... The U.S. ended up
Chinese
President Xi Jinping said that "we are on a new Long March now" during
his inspection tour of Jiangxi Province this week and encouraged people
to gain strength from the spirit of the Long March to overcome
difficulties and obstacles, China's state media outlets reported on
Thursday.
Interview With Ren Zhengfei, Founder And CEO Of Chinese Telecom Giant Huawei | TIME
https://youtu.be/Nl2jCWDwE8w
BY imposing restrictions on Huawei Technologies Co, the administration of US President Donald Trump may force the Chinese company to do something that no one in tech has dared to do for a long time: Challenge Google’s control of the Android universe, which earned the US company a huge European fine last year.
Huawei faces two big threats from US technology export restrictions. One is the loss of American components for its products, a blow it cannot parry immediately if it wants to keep making top-flight smartphones.
The other is the potential withdrawal of its Android license, which would stop Huawei from preinstalling the latest Google-approved version of the operating system and some key services Western users see as necessary - above all Google’s Play Store, the biggest repository of Android apps.
This particular obstacle could, under the right conditions, turn into a Huawei strength in Europe, a market that accounts for almost a third of the company’s smartphone unit sales, according to market analytics company IDC.
Last July, the European Commission fined Google €4.34bil for imposing illegal restrictions on smartphone manufacturers. In exchange for the right to preinstall the Play Store, they had to agree, among other things, not to sell devices running versions of Android not approved by Google: so-called Android forks. These operating systems are developed from the open source version of Android, which anyone can use, including Huawei if the US bans it from using American technology. Amazon.com Inc’s Fire OS is the best-known Android fork today, though there are others around.
The commission wrote that by obstructing the development of Android forks, Google and its parent company Alphabet Inc “closed off an important channel for competitors to introduce apps and services, in particular general search services, which could be pre-installed on Android forks.”
In its ruling, it made a strong case for forks as platforms for Google-independent innovation that, if they were allowed to spread widely, could have curbed Google’s market dominance in various areas.
Google has appealed the ruling, but it has also removed restrictions on handset makers to avoid further fines. This, however, hasn’t led to the proliferation of alternative platforms based on open-source Android: Big phone makers are locked into comfortable relationships with Google and see no need to experiment. Days after the European Union fined Google, Huawei, at the time the biggest phone manufacturer that provided an easy opportunity to install alternative Android-based operating systems on its devices, ended the programme without explanation.
If Google takes away the Android license, it’ll yank Huawei out of its comfort zone. The company isn’t likely to give up the European market without a fight, after spending billions of dollars developing a customer base. Consumers in some European countries now appear to be put off Huawei by the US attack, although, paradoxically, it appears to have fuelled the brand’s popularity in France.
France for Huawei
Percentage* of consumers who say they'll consider buying a Huawei device when they're next in the market for a smartphone
Source: YouGov BrandIndex
The company has said it developed its own operating system (likely an Android fork), and it’s been trying to lure developers to its app store.
If the US stops Huawei from preinstalling the Play Store, the Chinese manufacturer probably won’t spend much time educating consumers on how to install it on their own (the way people do now with phones bought in China).
That’s not what most users expect on a new, expensive device. Instead, Huawei will want to offer developers an easy way to sell apps not just in the Google store but also in one preinstalled on Huawei devices - to “multi-home” them.
Huawei hasn’t been eager to get into an open confrontation with Google, which was a valued partner.
But a breakup ordered by the US government changes things. Huawei, with plenty of resources of its own (and most likely with support from the Chinese government, determined to fight back against the US), could soon be investing heavily in the marketing and improvement of an Android fork. Given Huawei’s marketing potential, the effort isn’t necessarily doomed. And it could boost Asian and European developers deterred from competing in some areas - such as mapping, video services or even search - by Google’s enormous power.
Given the pushback in recent years against US tech companies’ relentless data collection and the widespread mistrust of Trump’s administration in Europe, there could well be demand for a Google-free phone from a major manufacturer known for superior hardware.
I know I’d be interested, and the French would probably lap it up, judging by their reaction to the US threats. The EU regulators, too, might be intrigued to see evidence that perhaps the Google antitrust ruling didn’t come too late.
This is something of a utopian scenario, I know. Huawei may never need to go on the warpath against Google: The US and China could strike a trade deal that would make the specter of restrictions go away.
Or, if Huawei is banned from buying US technology, it could find itself unable to produce marketable phones for a while. And, of course, it is a company from Communist China, making it difficult for European regulators, and even for private developers, to embrace it as a savior from the overly dominant US tech companies.
Monopolies in tech don’t last forever, however.
Sometimes they just need a push to start showing cracks. If the US moves against Huawei, it might be unknowingly giving such a push to Google in the smartphone market. — Bloomberg Viewpoint
But it needs a lot of time. During this process, China
cannot avoid paying a price and will have a difficult time. But Huawei
still has a domestic market of more than a billion Chinese people and
the market of the Third World countries. When the Trump administration
cracks down on Huawei, the US also goes through hard times. The final
victory will certainly be China's, but China must have adequate
determination and endurance.
KUALA LUMPUR: It looked like the start of semiconductor manufacturers’ nightmare when US President Donald Trump fired another salvo in the escalating US-China trade war by blacklisting China’s mobile phone equipment giant, Huawei Technologies Co Ltd.
The act sent shock waves along the supply chain of the global semiconductor industry, sparking strong sell-offs in semiconductor companies’ shares worldwide. The same was seen in Malaysia, which caused the Bursa Malaysia Technology Index to sink 3.47% on Tuesday — the biggest loser among the indices — led by companies linked to the industry.
But it may not be a losing battle in the long run, at least not for Malaysian companies. The trade diversion that will arise from Huawei’s ban in the US, which effectively cuts off US chipmakers from the supply chain of Huawei — the world’s largest provider of networking gear and the second-largest smartphone vendor — may benefit domestic players here.
Pentamaster Group Bhd co-founder and chairman Chuah Choon Bin told The Edge Financial Daily that he expects the group’s telecommunications segment to see a 20% to 30% decline in sales as a result of Huawei’s blacklisting in the US. The contraction may take away some 18% in total sales it anticipates for the year.
However, Chuah said Pentamaster may also stand to benefit from the ban, as he expects China will become more aggressive in ramping up their product developments in the face of what happened to Huawei.
So, he sees a silver lining for the group in the form of trade diverted from US chip suppliers to those located elsewhere, possibly in Malaysia, where Pentamaster supplies chip tester equipment or automated tester equipment.
As such, Chuah does not expect Pentamaster to be greatly affected by Huawei’s ban in the US. In fact, the eventual tally may show Pentamaster gaining from the situation.
Pentamaster was among the technology counters on Bursa Malaysia that took a beating on Tuesday, following the news on Huawei’s ban.
Its shares sank as much as 29 sen on Tuesday to RM4.05, before easing to settle at RM4.10, down 24 sen or 5.53% at market close. It was one of the top losers in Bursa Malaysia’s Technology Index, which retreated to 30.9 points, dragging the FBM KLCI down 0.1% to close at 1,603.74.
Other semiconductor stocks that were badly hit include: Inari Amertron, which fell 10 sen or 6.67% to RM1.40; Mi Technovation Bhd, which was down 11 sen or 6.43% to RM1.60; Globetronics Technology Bhd, which retreated 10 sen or 5.92% to RM1.59; and Frontken Corp Bhd, which fell eight sen or 5.63% to RM1.34.
Nonetheless, the rebound on Wall Street among semiconductor stocks that were bogged down by fears over the trade war’s ripple effects, raised hope that its peers in Malaysia may follow suit, if the upward trend seen on Tuesday is sustainable.
The share price recovery was fuelled by the temporary 90-day reprieve that was granted to Huawei on Monday. The initial ban was to take effect on May 20. The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index gained 2.1% to end a three-day slump on Tuesday.
“The disruption to (the) supply chain will definitely be negative in the short term,” said an analyst who tracks the semiconductor industry, citing as example people who are considering switching mobile phones after the news that Alphabet Inc’s Google would be cutting off the supply of hardware and selected software services to Huawei once the 90 days is up.
“The trade war seems like breaking the supply chain into two ... this is going to be bad in the short term. But if China cannot get their supply from the US, they are likely to turn inwards ... [or to] countries like Malaysia,” the analyst added.
A Singapore-based fund manager commented that Malaysian tech companies presently do not have much to do with Huawei. But the ban is causing everyone in China to sit up and rethink their supply chain strategy. “In short, no one will believe in the US [anymore]. It is not a reliable and credible supplier. What it means is that it is positive for some of those tech companies in Malaysia that can offer what the Chinese need,” he said.
Some analysts, however, have a more cautious stance, saying it is too early to draw any conclusions on the matter given that it is hard to predict any retaliatory moves the two countries could make.
The lingering concern remains that any slowdown in international trade volume will not augur well for the world economy, including Malaysia. Meanwhile, some have pointed out that the valuation of Malaysian semiconductor stocks are relatively higher compared with elsewhere.
China-U.S. trade tensions | Mideast tensions take turn for worse
https://youtu.be/eQbQbvGBDaM
封杀华为 发难大疆 美滥用国家力量打压中国企业!| CCTV中文国际
https://youtu.be/dtT0rHgJ9-I
Growing US pressure won't force China to submit
The US Department of Homeland Security warned that drones pose a
potential information risk because they contain components that can
compromise users' data and share information on servers other than
users.
Since nearly 80 percent of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
(UAV) drones in North America are produced by China's Dajiang Innovation
(DJI), a Shenzhen-based company, analysts generally believe that
tarnishing DJI's reputation may be laying the groundwork for taking
actionsagainst DJI.
DJI is the world's largest producer of
civilian drones and is said to control more than 70 percent of the
world's civilian drone market. The drones it produces are not only good
in quality but also cheap. Many products are under $1,000, so they are
popular and increasingly versatile.
The US military is also a DJI
drone user. The use of DJI drones by the US military has not completely
stopped following the controversy over its information security. This
shows that while the US has real concerns about the information security
risks of DJI UAV , there is no real evidence to support such concerns.
The
US Department of Homeland Security raised the issue of the information
security risks of UAV to increase leverage and pressure on China after
the US decision to cut off supplies to Huawei. It seems Washington is in
a hurry to press China to make concessions and reach a trade deal at an
early date beneficial only to the US.
The vast majority of users
in the US use DJI drones in non-classified areas. The airspace over
sensitive US institutions is closed to drones and there is another set
of security measures that have nothing to do with the use of DJI drones
in the US market. The prevention of forest fires, assistance with
construction layouts, and the development of express delivery services
to remote areas are obviously not the direction that intelligence
agencies are aiming for. It is hard to believe that DJI has an incentive
to engage in "intelligence activities" at the risk of being shut out of
international markets.
The US is abusing the concept of national
security. It is the US that was caught a few years ago spying on the
leaders of its allies. It is now saying that Beijing's intelligence
threat is everywhere. A big part of it is putting on a show. It may be
partly because the US does install a lot of "back doors" into its
electronic exports, Washington thinks other countries will do the same.
China
will not fall into the trap to make unconditional compromises as
Washington increases its pressure. If the US cracks down on Chinese
companies, American consumers and suppliers will also suffer losses.
The
US is having a profound effect on the global economic order by abusing
national security and trampling on commercial principles. Current US
administration is destroying the reputation and national image that
generations of Americans have built. Such arrogance and hegemony are by
no means good signs for the US..
Chinese people do not know whether we should call US
approaches hegemonic politics or profiteering politics. But in short,
they are crooked means. The threat of tariffs will not work. Neither
will US threats against Chinese companies create a shock wave against
China. The US is picking a wrong opponent at a wrong time. It will find
no way of crafting a good result from a strategic mistake.
China-U.S. trade tensions | Mideast tensions take turn for worse
https://youtu.be/eQbQbvGBDaM
封杀华为 发难大疆 美滥用国家力量打压中国企业!| CCTV中文国际
https://youtu.be/dtT0rHgJ9-I
Growing US pressure won't force China to submit
The US Department of Homeland Security warned that drones pose a
potential information risk because they contain components that can
compromise users' data and share information on servers other than
users.
Since nearly 80 percent of the Unmanned Aerial Vehicle
(UAV) drones in North America are produced by China's Dajiang Innovation
(DJI), a Shenzhen-based company, analysts generally believe that
tarnishing DJI's reputation may be laying the groundwork for taking
actionsagainst DJI.
DJI is the world's largest producer of
civilian drones and is said to control more than 70 percent of the
world's civilian drone market. The drones it produces are not only good
in quality but also cheap. Many products are under $1,000, so they are
popular and increasingly versatile.
The US military is also a DJI
drone user. The use of DJI drones by the US military has not completely
stopped following the controversy over its information security. This
shows that while the US has real concerns about the information security
risks of DJI UAV , there is no real evidence to support such concerns.
The
US Department of Homeland Security raised the issue of the information
security risks of UAV to increase leverage and pressure on China after
the US decision to cut off supplies to Huawei. It seems Washington is in
a hurry to press China to make concessions and reach a trade deal at an
early date beneficial only to the US.
The vast majority of users
in the US use DJI drones in non-classified areas. The airspace over
sensitive US institutions is closed to drones and there is another set
of security measures that have nothing to do with the use of DJI drones
in the US market. The prevention of forest fires, assistance with
construction layouts, and the development of express delivery services
to remote areas are obviously not the direction that intelligence
agencies are aiming for. It is hard to believe that DJI has an incentive
to engage in "intelligence activities" at the risk of being shut out of
international markets.
The US is abusing the concept of national
security. It is the US that was caught a few years ago spying on the
leaders of its allies. It is now saying that Beijing's intelligence
threat is everywhere. A big part of it is putting on a show. It may be
partly because the US does install a lot of "back doors" into its
electronic exports, Washington thinks other countries will do the same.
China
will not fall into the trap to make unconditional compromises as
Washington increases its pressure. If the US cracks down on Chinese
companies, American consumers and suppliers will also suffer losses.
The
US is having a profound effect on the global economic order by abusing
national security and trampling on commercial principles. Current US
administration is destroying the reputation and national image that
generations of Americans have built. Such arrogance and hegemony are by
no means good signs for the US..
Chinese people do not know whether we should call US
approaches hegemonic politics or profiteering politics. But in short,
they are crooked means. The threat of tariffs will not work. Neither
will US threats against Chinese companies create a shock wave against
China. The US is picking a wrong opponent at a wrong time. It will find
no way of crafting a good result from a strategic mistake.